K10 Scores starting to surface

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dave_graham

really? hmmm...i don't see that at all.



*yawn*

you DO realize that phenom will use DDR2-800, will launch at higher clock speeds, and will have better mainboard support at launch?

comparing C2D to a server processor is like comparing a Humvee against a X5. On pavement, the X5 will "win." off road, the Humvee. Two different focuses with two different applications.

calm down.

dave

---

I really doubt that extra 133mhz on the memory is going to help a lot, maybe 1-2% at most. And when the desktop Phenom launches, Intel will be close to launching the 45nm version of C2D, so the clockspeed gap is even bigger. I don't see how AMD is going to win this round.

Just like the Hummer vs X5, most people will drive on paved roads most of the time (gaming) instead of off-roading (server stuff), so an X5 (C2D) is more suitable for most people than the Hummer (K10).

you just forgot that most people would by a X5...

...but it's the Hummer that will fullfill your pockets. :)

The big question is; how well will it overclock on air?

Any K10 overclocking results out there?

last time: this is BARCELLONA, this is OPTERONS 2XXX AND 8XXX, this is for SERVERS AND HPC, and they NEVER OC!

Unfortunatelly, of course! :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by awdrifter

I really doubt that extra 133mhz on the memory is going to help a lot, maybe 1-2% at most. And when the desktop Phenom launches, Intel will be close to launching the 45nm version of C2D, so the clockspeed gap is even bigger. I don't see how AMD is going to win this round.

Just like the Hummer vs X5, most people will drive on paved roads most of the time (gaming) instead of off-roading (server stuff), so an X5 (C2D) is more suitable for most people than the Hummer (K10).

---

The memory bandwith should help K10 a lot.
Little L2 cache = Big bandwith dependance.

Barcelona got 1mo L2 Per core (512X4+2)/4.

Now compare any E2160 with E6600 at 333X9 and 333 ram, next try at same cpu freq but 666 ram or less. You'll see an hudge improvement for the E2160, and just a little for the E6600.

AMD is just launching this young boy, improving the caches size and frequency is already programmed.
I would like to see the barca with 4X2MoL2 and 8Mo L3 at start, but no ... no dreams yet :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohannesRS

last time: this is BARCELLONA, this is OPTERONS 2XXX AND 8XXX, this is for SERVERS AND HPC, and they NEVER OC!

Unfortunatelly, of course! :D

---

I beg to differ ;) Opterons are built on the best silicon AMD has to offer. It's not the cpu's themselves which aren't able to overclock, it's the mobos they're placed in and the restrictive reg.ecc. that's required of them. If you're able to run Opterons in an enthusiast mobo such as the Asus L1N64, performance should be just as good/if not better than any desktop part you'll ever get:

http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/2549/511memser8.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by misteroadster

The memory bandwith should help K10 a lot.
Little L2 cache = Big bandwith dependance.

Barcelona got 1mo L2 Per core (512X4+2)/4.

Now compare any E2160 with E6600 at 333X9 and 333 ram, next try at same cpu freq but 666 ram or less. You'll see an hudge improvement for the E2160, and just a little for the E6600.

AMD is just launching this young boy, improving the caches size and frequency is already programmed.
I would like to see the barca with 4X2MoL2 and 8Mo L3 at start, but no ... no dreams yet :D

---

L3 is a huge addition as it decreases the latency of the IMC with the memory :up:

s7: yes, but you know that that is the exception on the rule. you are using a "highlander" (there must be only one) board for server chips, and not a server board. Ok, it works: sometimes, not always, and not, as far as I know, straightforward.

I think that it would quite difficult to make a proper comparison of how well the desktops will oc even from this kind of combo. But, I bound for you: I WANNA see this results as soon as possible. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by misteroadster

The memory bandwith should help K10 a lot.
Little L2 cache = Big bandwith dependance.

Barcelona got 1mo L2 Per core (512X4+2)/4.

Now compare any E2160 with E6600 at 333X9 and 333 ram, next try at same cpu freq but 666 ram or less. You'll see an hudge improvement for the E2160, and just a little for the E6600.

AMD is just launching this young boy, improving the caches size and frequency is already programmed.
I would like to see the barca with 4X2MoL2 and 8Mo L3 at start, but no ... no dreams yet :D

---

As I'm sure you remember from pioneering the gigabyte 939 board, memory and timming are very important. Seem to remember a few wr going to cpus running 200-300 mhz slower than the previous record, but with higher memory clocks. You can make up for a lot with a memory speed advantage.

Yep, AMD is not INTEL and vice et versa.. ;)

If E2160 was high end, overclocking will be more funny with more memory importance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PhilDoc

As I'm sure you remember from pioneering the gigabyte 939 board, memory and timming are very important. Seem to remember a few wr going to cpus running 200-300 mhz slower than the previous record, but with higher memory clocks. You can make up for a lot with a memory speed advantage.

---

i'm actually waiting for someone to develop a BIOS that allows the MC and Cores to be synchronous again.

but that's just me.

dave

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dave_graham

i'm actually waiting for someone to develop a BIOS that allows the MC and Cores to be synchronous again.

but that's just me.

dave

---

I may be way off base, but I seem to remember that the core and the memory controller ran at two different speeds. If that's what you're refering to it would certainly help, but I assumed it was hard-wired and not something under bios control. If not let me know and I'll try and give you an intellegent comment, lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PhilDoc

I may be way off base, but I seem to remember that the core and the memory controller ran at two different speeds. If that's what you're refering to it would certainly help, but I assumed it was hard-wired and not something under bios control. If not let me know and I'll try and give you an intellegent comment, lol

---

they're 400mhz separated on a single power plane and 200mhz separated on a dual. *shrug*

i want them clocked together. :)

dave

What happend to Informal ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ubermann

What happend to Informal ?

---

eh?

dave

Uberman,some of us have to work ,you know :) :p: .Why you ask?:cool:

I do have a few words to say and i must say i am really pleased with K10.It does very well in current platform,and does that at low frequencies and with a low power usage too(this is great news for those planing to swap RevF with K10).Also,i am a bit surprised about the "reviews"(both anand and tech report are sub standard ones-probably due to time issues) which used the B1,but i guess AMD knows what they are doing.BA is the launch stepping,so i expect the reviews with them hitting the net around the end of the month.
AMD finally have quad core in the most needed sector and they have a really good and promising one.With clocks up to 2.6Ghz for server parts at the end of the year,there should be some really interesting reviews coming up(by that time,the whole platform/BIOS issue will be done with).

Gateway fore one is buying :)
http://www.techpowerup.com/index.php?39579

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by informal

both anand and tech report are sub standard ones-probably due to time issues

---

So the two reviews that show it not coming up to scratch are sub standard?

As Dr Evil would say... riiiiight

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bokis

Gateway fore one is buying :)
http://www.techpowerup.com/index.php?39579

---

of course given the significant advantage that they provide in the most lucrative market right now (virtualization, where people are paying up to 6 times more for performance compared to regular high end servers)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gundersausage

So the two reviews that show it not coming up to scratch are sub standard?

As Dr Evil would say... riiiiight

---

You may want to read the Anand Quad article again. On average a Barcelona running at 2G equated to a Xeon running at 2.25G and that was running two benches that highly favor Intel. Take those out and it equates to one running at a little less then 2.4G. That's a 20% increase

As far as Gateway selling them, I expect most manufatures to offer them in the near future. I saw one article were someone bought 15,000 of them to build a super computer, lol. It'd be fun to be part of that, lol

gateway, dell, sun, hp, ibm are all the Tier One vendors who will be selling quad boxes (well, gateway....whatever)

Boxx, Appro, et al. would be Tier Two's that will be carrying them as well.

*shrug*

not worried about commercial/enterprise acceptance, personally.

dave

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PhilDoc

You may want to read the Anand Quad article again. On average a Barcelona running at 2G equated to a Xeon running at 2.25G and that was running two benches that highly favor Intel. Take those out and it equates to one running at a little less then 2.4G. That's a 20% increase

---

Yeah I can tell you were all blown away by your defensive posts :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by informal

Uberman,some of us have to work ,you know :) :p: .Why you ask?:cool:

I do have a few words to say and i must say i am really pleased with K10.It does very well in current platform,and does that at low frequencies and with a low power usage too(this is great news for those planing to swap RevF with K10).Also,i am a bit surprised about the "reviews"(both anand and tech report are sub standard ones-probably due to time issues) which used the B1,but i guess AMD knows what they are doing.BA is the launch stepping,so i expect the reviews with them hitting the net around the end of the month.
AMD finally have quad core in the most needed sector and they have a really good and promising one.With clocks up to 2.6Ghz for server parts at the end of the year,there should be some really interesting reviews coming up(by that time,the whole platform/BIOS issue will be done with).

---

I would like to know about this more, is current TDP for K10 considering all the new power saving features? if so what is the TDP of a upgrade on a mobo that doesnt support all new power savings?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gundersausage

Yeah I can tell you were all blown away by your defensive posts :rolleyes:

---

You lost me, I'm just reading the article, poor as it is. I have no investment in AMD. I don't own any AMD stock and I don't think of my computer as an extension of my penis ( I don't take this personally). Do I want them to do well, certainly, we all should. If they do well we all get faster cpus and great prices.

I understand that you're young, but instead of trying to taunt someone into a flame war, why not read the articles and give some intellegent input.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PhilDoc

You lost me, I'm just reading the article, poor as it is. I have no investment in AMD. I don't own any AMD stock and I don't think of my computer as an extension of my penis ( I don't take this personally). Do I want them to do well, certainly, we all should. If they do well we all get faster cpus and great prices.

I understand that you're young, but instead of trying to taunt someone into a flame war, why not read the articles and give some intellegent input.

---

I read them and came to a different conclusion, so take your own advice and stop taking it personally.. and assuming you know my age is embarrassingly ignorant and compromises your entire little "no investment" diatribe

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by metro.cl

I would like to know about this more, is current TDP for K10 considering all the new power saving features? if so what is the TDP of a upgrade on a mobo that doesnt support all new power savings?

---

i'll have to see.

AMD still quotes ACP at 75w for 95W parts on single plane boards....so, i think we can easily replicate this.

I'm looking to get a S3992-E in within the next two weeks and compare it to the 3992 (single plane) i have now. will test with BA chips on that (to keep things consistent, etc.

cheers,

dave